Snyder is poison when it comes to DC profits. especially in the long run it seems.

What I do know:

1) Snyder with absolutely no interference from WB gave us "Man of Steel." I really loved Man of Steel, minus a couple of minor things.

2) Snyder with a studio wanting to force Batman and Wonder Woman and a bunch of metahumans on a computer gave us a movie that is... mostly not good. With some merit, I would argue, but definitely representative of a studio wanting to forcibly grow their DCEU prematurely on the back of Snyder's movie.

3) Snyder with a studio hijacking his movie and having it completely reedited by Joss Whedon with additional footage, then recut by WB when even Whedon was done... gave us a movie that is almost entirely no good at all.

So I'm not entirely sure the Snyder "trilogy" informs us much about him as a filmmaker. It kind of seems like WB ought to have left him mostly alone.

Going to have to disagree. For me WB should have either replaced him after MoS proved divisive OR kept much tighter control of him with BvS. Either way he should have been gone after BvS.

Man of Steel was a solid movie but there's no arguing that it started the divide in the fan base and it was all down hill from there. And it wasn't even Snyder's vision, it was Goyer's (with some help from Nolan) originally. The idea of doing a more grounded retelling of Superman's origin, especially after the success of The Dark Knight, had merit and you can still see that in the final film. It's a good but flawed movie and that's on both Goyer and Snyder.

The one element we know that was 100% Snyder's idea is the infamous neck snap, which he stupidly went ahead with despite everyone telling him it was a bad idea. Much as I don't like the idea of Superman killing Zod, there is precedent for it in the comics, but it was handled so poorly. No real narrative build up, nothing in the film says it's important because they never establish Superman's aversion to killing, poor staging and then no pay off afterwards. It was controversial because it was Superman and it was done because it was controversial, which is a poor reason to do it and it backfired spectacularly.

Batman v Superman - not going to argue that WB wanted to rush to a shared universe and pushed things faster than they should. That's totally on them. To be fair that's what fans wanted & had been asking for since at least 2008 but WB should have been planning properly since then rather than just constantly reacting and being on the back foot (something which has carried right through to JL).

Whether they pushed Batman on Synder or (as he claims) he suggested Batman and they just jumped on board no more questions asked because they saw billion dollar Batman is up for debate.

What's not up for debate is that Batman v Superman was his vision. If there was one movie that WB needed to play safe it was this one. It needed to be a big, popular crowd pleaser that got audiences on board with the DCU. It needed to be their Iron Man or Avengers. Look at what they got. There is no way they mandated that movie. JL cameos maybe (though the shoddy execution of that is all on Snyder and Terrio) but everything else - TDKR Batman who brands and guns down criminals, a borderline depressed Superman, premature death of Superman - that was all Snyder.

Even the theatrical cut - it was still his cut. The Ultimate cut is superior, the story is much more coherent and flows far better, but it does drag. The studio wasn't wrong to cut it by half an hour, Snyder and his editor just cut the wrong stuff, leaving important story beats out (Africa, Clark's investigation) and including stuff like the knightmare scene. But either way it still doesn't fix the characterizations of Batman and Superman. It still has the infamous "Martha" moment, Lex is still terrible, etc.

He was the wrong person for the job and it was the wrong vision for the DCU.

Which brings us to Justice League.

WB screwed up. A LOT. They didn't allow for BvS to fail. Despite MoS being divisive, they let Snyder effectively set the tone for the entire universe and plan out BvS and JL and then they scheduled production to start within weeks of BvS opening. So when BvS tanked they were between a rock and a hard place. They either delayed the movie, replaced Snyder and started from scratch (a massive and costly upheaval since sets and props were all complete and the cast were literally arriving on set) or they try and course correct on the fly.

IF reports are true then Snyder's cut was unwatchable back in January. As much as I hate BvS, I'm not sure I believe that. There's been a lot of verified leaks post release, including a break down of what was Snyder and what was Whedon in the finished film. Based on everything that's come out it seems like the overall story was the same. Snyder's cut would have had more establishing scenes for the three new characters (unfinished clips have leaked showing Barry saving Iris and Cyborg learning to fly, plus Momoa has spoken about the cut Atlantis stuff) and a different take on Superman (plus none of the saving civilians in during the final battle) but that's about it. My guess is by unwatchable they meant boring. Snyder's cut had more humor than BvS (we know it did from early footage) but likely took itself very seriously and felt too heavy (again like BvS). You can see elements of it in the film still - Aquaman as a loner, Cyborg's first scenes where he's withdrawn from the world and talks about who is the monster. These elements work, but if you then take out some of the lighter moments Whedon added (such as Aquaman and the lasso) and add back in a more silent and stoic Superman then it was very likely missing the heart, hope and heroics that WB/DC wanted and felt like more of the same dreary world they wanted to get away from in the wake of BvS.

Bringing in Whedon to help fix the movie wasn't a mistake. The mistake was trusting Snyder 3 times in a row, especially the 3rd time when it was clear the general audience had rejected his vision for these characters. The mistake was not pushing the film back when it became clear that they needed such substantial reshoots and Henry Cavill couldn't shave (the VFX leakers have said that based on that alone the movie should have been delayed). The mistake was mandating a sub 2 hour movie (though I do agree with them trimming some fat off - whilst stuff like Deathstroke breaking Lex out of prison & Barry saving Iris from a car crash would be cool to see it wouldn't have added anything to the story of the movie, some more depth to the villain would have been nice and we needed to see the world's reaction to both the invasion and Superman's return). I have no doubt Whedon could have fixed the movie far better were he given more time. Two of the elements that get the most praise are the character interactions and Superman. The first was substantially added to by Whedon, the second was almost entirely Whedon. He was stuck with the basic story as he couldn't redo the entire movie.

With hindsight I'm willing to bet WB wish they'd delayed the movie and replaced Snyder after BvS. It would have been expensive and embarrassing but the cost of the re-shoots and the massive amount of money left on the table by JL (not to mention the brand damage) has to be much higher than the cost of delay would ever have been.

I did enjoy the movie but it did have some major flaws and like everyone else have noticed, you can tell which parts were Synder's and which were Whedon's. I liked WW, Aquaman, and Flash. I thought Batman was better than in BvS but to be honest, I really wish we could get some detective elements to the character because I feel that this version relies more on brutes and brute force than brains. Cyborg was cool too but I don't think there was enough material for him to work with.

Is Affleck being replaced still confirmed to be a rumor or is it planned to happen?

Man of Steel was that way also because of studio interference, after Superman Returns was a disappointment they made the decision to have a bunch of action since SR having little to no action was one of the main issues most critics had, they just over did it with MOS.

Green Lantern was made to be totally like a Marvel movie but it failed, the humor they tried just didn't work even if it was what Marvel movies did.

I like snyder's style it just doesn't work if you're going to build a universe to kill off Superman before Justice League, we all know he'll come back to life then. I don't mind the DCEU starting with "end level" events and a "Mature" DC Universe, in fact I liked it since it set it apart from Marvel and most DC heroes didn't need to be established, the problem is when WB doesn't know if they want A or B and instead give us AB which doesn't match well.

The one element we know that was 100% Snyder's idea is the infamous neck snap, which he stupidly went ahead with despite everyone telling him it was a bad idea. Much as I don't like the idea of Superman killing Zod, there is precedent for it in the comics, but it was handled so poorly. No real narrative build up, nothing in the film says it's important because they never establish Superman's aversion to killing, poor staging and then no pay off afterwards. It was controversial because it was Superman and it was done because it was controversial, which is a poor reason to do it and it backfired spectacularly.

The neck-snapping is the dumbest thing to get mad about in MoS. 1) He visibly and audibly didn't want to do It, felt terrible after he did and screamed/cried. 2) He famously killed Zod and BOTH of Zod's cronies in the comics about 3 decades beforehand... it was a big classic story which shaped him from that point on and his resolving not to kill rather than it just be this innate boy scout thing. 3) He murdered Zod in the original Superman II, smiled about it even, and nobody cared then. Why care now?

Though it is admittedly strange that immediately afterward in BvS, he follows up killing Zod by... killing him again, basically. Why not just punch Doomsday into the sun or deep space? He can't fly. His momentum would just take him away.

The neck-snapping is the dumbest thing to get mad about in MoS. 1) He visibly and audibly didn't want to do It, felt terrible after he did and screamed/cried. 2) He famously killed Zod and BOTH of Zod's cronies in the comics about 3 decades beforehand... it was a big classic story which shaped him from that point on and his resolving not to kill rather than it just be this innate boy scout thing. 3) He murdered Zod in the original Superman II, smiled about it even, and nobody cared then. Why care now?

Though it is admittedly strange that immediately afterward in BvS, he follows up killing Zod by... killing him again, basically. Why not just punch Doomsday into the sun or deep space? He can't fly. His momentum would just take him away.

But only after Zod and the two others were de-powered, he knocked Zod into a pit.

In some extended tv cuts of Superman 2, Zod and his henchmen were shown alive after having been thrown into the pit, being escorted by the police. He also was brought back to life by Superman at the end of the Richard Donner cut.

But I see his implied death in the cinematic Richard Lester cut as fitting considering what he did. The scene was also well done in Man of Steel.

In some extended tv cuts of Superman 2, Zod and his henchmen were shown alive after having been thrown into the pit, being escorted by the police. He also was brought back to life by Superman at the end of the Richard Donner cut.

But I see his implied death in the cinematic Richard Lester cut as fitting considering what he did. The scene was also well done in Man of Steel.

the Richard Donner cut did the thing, of spinning the Earth backwards at the end, like they did in the first movie, Its weird seeing the 1st one do that scene, and then the Richard Donner cut of Superman 2 doing the same exact thing.

the Richard Donner cut did the thing, of spinning the Earth backwards at the end, like they did in the first movie, Its weird seeing the 1st one do that scene, and then the Richard Donner cut of Superman 2 doing the same exact thing.

Its because that ending was originally going to be for Superman 2 in which Zod would've destroyed the planet and then Superman undoing the effects, but then Richard Donner decided to put it at the end of the first film to give it a more grandiose conclusion.

Both films were also developed together as well, so the earth spinning was seen as a conclusion to a two-part gigantic film consisting of Superman and Superman ii, but that changed when Richard Donner didn't want to risk the first film bombing, and gave it the more epic ending instead of the original cliffhanger showcasing Superman throwing the missiles into space and freeing Zod.

I seriously doubt it was Snyder's idea to do Death of Superman in the second DCEU movie. Warner Brothers has wanted to do that for a long time, and they took their opportunity.

Superman rightfully snapped Zod's necks and fanboys lost their minds.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Technodrome Member: Why’s CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy running?

Technodrome Moderator: Because we have to chase him.

Technodrome Member: He didn’t do anything wrong.

Technodrome Moderator: Because he’s the hero Technodrome Forums deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So we’ll hunt him because he can take it. Because he’s not our hero. He’s a silent guardian. A watchful protector. A dark knight.

The neck-snapping is the dumbest thing to get mad about in MoS. 1) He visibly and audibly didn't want to do It, felt terrible after he did and screamed/cried. 2) He famously killed Zod and BOTH of Zod's cronies in the comics about 3 decades beforehand... it was a big classic story which shaped him from that point on and his resolving not to kill rather than it just be this innate boy scout thing. 3) He murdered Zod in the original Superman II, smiled about it even, and nobody cared then. Why care now?

Though it is admittedly strange that immediately afterward in BvS, he follows up killing Zod by... killing him again, basically. Why not just punch Doomsday into the sun or deep space? He can't fly. His momentum would just take him away.

Cavill sold the emotion of the scene, but narratively where did it come from & where did it go to? I acknowledged there was precedent for it from the comics (agree to disagree on Superman II, the intended & filmed ending was their arrest & even with that cut the tone and reactions of the characters never made me think they were dead) but it was poorly handled here & added nothing. In the comics they used it as a defining moment of character development but in the films it happens & then is never mentioned again. It was only important/controversial because of what people already knew about the character, it was done to be edgy/controversial & nothing more. If you're going to go there you need the story to support it but MoS didn't, it just went straight to a joke scene & then finale.

My point though was that it was a bad decision creatively & one of the things that began the fan division that this universe never recovered from.

Plus, like you say, they followed straight up with Doomsday which makes the whole thing feel a bit redundant & repetitive.

So I watched the movie a second time and I feel better about it. Sure it had some flaws but I'm more accepting of what it is. I enjoy it even more now. Hope the blu ray gonna be packed with added bonuses.

I am still amazed by how critical people are of this movie......
If this was a marvel movie of the same quality people would be worshiping Marvel pretty much what happened with Captain American Civil War